Matthew 10:35-17-"For I have come to turn "'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law--" (Whatever happened to honor thy father and mother?)

19. Forgetful...

Exodus 34:6-7-Go.d remembers sins

Jeremiah 31:34-Go.d doesn't remember sin

20. Died in Two Places...

Numbers 33:38-Aaron dies on Mount Hor

Deuteronomy 10:6-He died in Moserah

21. Foolish Questions...

Proverbs 26:4-Dont answer a fools question

Proverbs 26:5 (one passage later)-Answer a fool

22. A Dish Best Served Cold...

Psalm 58:10-11-Celebrate revenge

Proverbs 24:17-18-Dont celebrate the misfortune of your enemy

He responded with... (sorry if this takes a while to read)

I commend you on your seemingly thorough research into the Bible.
1. Genesis 1:11-12 and Genesis 1:26-27 : there is no contradiction in these. The first one explains how plants were made and second explains how man was made.
2. Genesis 1:24-27 and Genesis 2:7 and 2:19 : The first tells the story of the creation of man. The second tells the story of Adam and Eve and the creation of the Garden of E.den, not of the creation of the world. Still no contradictions.
3. Genesis 1:31 : G.od was pleased at what he had created because sin had not yet entered the world. A.dam and E.ve had not yet been created. Genesis 6:5-6 tells of G.od's anger about the sins that men had done. The world is no longer sin free, thus G.od is mad. G.od gave us choice. Sometimes our choices disappoint him. This is not a contradiction.
4. N.oah and the ark: G.od specifies between clean and unclean animals. In the old testament, they were only allowed to eat clean animals. Thus he told them to bring 7 of each clean animal and two of each unclean animal. This is not a contradiction.
5. Genesis 7:1 and James 5:16 both use righteous to mean morally good. Romans 3:10 uses the word righteous to mean perfect and without s.in. Same word, different meanings. It's not a contradiction.
6. Ezekial 18:20 is speaking in a more literal, "this is how it is" way. In Exodus 20:5, G.od is speaking in a hyperbolic manner in order to emphasize a point. It is not literal. There is no contradiction there.
7. Three blind men: Matthew is merely saying that two men were healed by J.esus. Mark is giving the story of how Bartimaeus, one of the two, was healed. Because he was focusing on Bartimaeus, the other was irrelevant to his story. Perhaps Mark knew Bartimaeus. There is no contradiction in those verses.
8. Of Annointments: Matthew and John both tell the same story. The only difference is that in John's account, the woman is named. If you were to have read more carefully, you would have found that Luke is telling of a completely different time that J.esus was annointed. He is telling a different story than Matthew and John. It is not a contradiction.
9. Of crosses: J.esus originally carried his own cross. However, unable to continue because he was weak, they made Simon of Cyrene carried it. Three out of the four gospels say that Simon was made to carry it after they left, implying that J.esus became too weak during the journey.
10: No time change: John 19:14-16 sites the sixth hour as when the whole trial began. Mark 15:25 cites the sixth hour as when darkness came over them, when J.esus was on the cross. The logical conclusion is that the trial, whipping and crucification took 12 hours, 6 to 6. There is no contradiction in these two verses.
11: Of famous words: Matthew, Luke and John report three diffrent last words because he said all three of them. Not all three authors recorded each of the words he said. They only recorded part. Mark 15:34 records the exact same words as Matthew 27:46. Still no contradictions...
12. Judas hung himself but somebody probably cut the rope after his body decomposed, and thus his g.uts fell out. Still no contradiciton.
13. These versus deal with the H.oly T.rinity, or the three in one. Nobody knows quite how it works because we cannot explain it through our minds. Perhaps they are all one in that they are linked telepathically? Either way, there is no contradiciton there.
14. Judgement: Did you read all these verses? Unless I'm going crazy, Leviticus 19:15 says nothing about judgeing people.
15. Fighting: Ummm...there is no 2 Samuel 25:9. 2 Samuel only goes up to 24:25.
16. Those who believe: John 3:13-J.esus is speaking to those there, saying that none of the people present have been to heaven thus it is indescribable to them. Still no contradiciton.
17: The Same Sons- Both verses say the exact same thing. I don't know if you read it or not, but the only difference is Amalek because Eliphaz had him with a different woman. 1Chronicles merely includes him whereas Genesis doesn't.
18. Mom and Dad- J.esus says this to illustrate the point that if anybody loves their father or mother more than J.esus, they are not worthy of him. He is also alluding to the fact that he came to destroy many of the old testatment laws.
19. Now I am really questioning whether or not you read these verses. Exodus 34:6-7 says nothing about G.od remembering sins. It only says that G.od punishes those who are wicked, but he forgives those who repent.
20. Dead is Dead: Perhaps Mount Hor was in Moserah? It does not specify and either way, dead is dead.
21. I pity the fool- "Do not answer a fool according to his folly" means to not stoop to his level. "Answer a fool according to his folly" means that sometimes folly has to be pointed out and corrected, but not for your own pleasure. Still no contadiction.
22. I Prefer Hot- Psalm 58:10-11 says that "the rig.hteous will be glad when they are av.enged" because it will show people that there is still a G.od. Proverbs 24:17-18 says not to gloat(aka bragging). Gloating and glad are not synonymous, therefore it isn't a contradiction.

As I have shown, all of your "contradictions" are not contradictions. I am supprised you didn't mention the feeding of the five/three thousand...Anyways, it seems to me the B.ible is pretty accurate. Perhaps you should revalue your opinion of the B.ible.

Ya, sorry about the length, I might post a new one, somewhat shorter... and thats one of the reasons I didn't post how I would respond.

As for the periods, this section of a debate is from a different website, which is ridiculously strict with its censorship. People who post there circumvent that by putting a period in the middle of the word, which confuses the filter. Its definitely two different people, myself being one of em.

The other reason I didnt post how i would respond is because i want to hear other peoples views, not my own. I can post them eventually, but right now I dont want to hear my own voice to much

Ah. Makes sense. Well in looking over your first few points.... where did you get you scripture verses from? Directly from TTA? Cause if so, he's wrong on a few. Verse numbers that is, not contradiction points.

Have a gander at this... I find there is no better argument against religion than the bible itself.

It's always interesting to see how the theists rationalize the old testament. From every Christian I get a different answer on these matters, and each is more creative than the next.

I presented the same question to a Catholic friend of mine and he referred me to a book called Is God A Moral Monster? by Paul Copan (long story short, yes he is, but to them, it's OK, cause it's god). The explanations and word play they try to use to justify their god's supposed actions are quite creative, and if they only stood back looked at it objectively they would see how senile they sound.

Now show him the list of atrocities and see what he has to say about those.

It is simple to recognize that the bible is full of contradictions. It is stupid to ignore and explain them away. If you have to make lies and excuses for your beliefs you need better beliefs, or better yet, no beliefs at all. What is wrong with knowing and not knowing?

When I find myself in times of trouble, Richard Dawkins comes to me, speaking words of reason, now I see, now I see.

Here's what usually happens. You point out the contradictions, and the theist will argue that the "contradictions" are just semantics and misinterpreted. So you move on and point out the immoral things that the bible advocates, such as slavery, genocide, incest, misogyny, etc. And the theist will pull out vagaries such as "god is outside the material world and consequently can't be understood" or "we are just simple humans and can't comprehend god's plan."

At which point you will contemplate homicide.

"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."

Arguing with them is pretty damn pointless, because no matter how many times and how conclusively you prove them wrong, it doesn't change their minds and they'll just carry on as before, except now they're feeling oppressed.

tell them how many people god killed and ask them if they can justify a being committing mass murder. Be amazed at how they will say it was for a good reason. here is a video explaining how many people god killed, it was around 2.5million Funny enough, Satan only killed 10 people and that was under the command of God as he was a servant.

on the contradictions, when it's talking about two animals, and then seven, i believe its refering to taking two of every unclean animal and 7 of ever clean animal. apparently the unclean were for eating, but we all know that wouldn't last all of the animals as they were on the ark for over half a year